The Bowling Alley: Daniel Plainview as (anti)hero...

Daniel is a learned, self-made man who understands that we are what we make of ourselves. Everything he has, he worked for.

He looks at Eli and sees someone very much like him in some ways - manipulative, charming, crafty, silver-tongued - and yet completely the opposite in other ways. Eli has never worked a day in his life - notice that while Daniel is often down in the oil himself - especially in the early days - Eli does not pick up a single tool in the film. When his church is being renovated, Eli merely walks along the floor boards, watching the work go on.

Daniel is disgusted by Eli's idea that he is somehow "entitled" to money and power. He is also disgusted because he can see that Eli (like, I daresay, most people who ask for money on the behalf of the divine) does NOT believe what he is doing or saying.

I have to say that I share Daniel's feelings.

Daniel may have lied in his time, but I'll take someone who lies to get land for a lower price over someone who perpetuates a terrible lie in order to completely control someone's life. Eli's lies are more destructive, more terrible.

The men are similar, and both take great pleasure in seeing the other repeatedly say the truth they do not want to acknowledge.

Eli forces Daniel to say the truth: "I have abandoned my boy."

Daniel forces Eli to say the truth: "I am a false prophet. God is a superstition."

They both hesitate before saying these things, because these things are truth, and that hurts. Note that Daniel can say the lie quite easily (talking about wanting to be "saved", etc) as can Eli.  But when it comes to telling a painful truth, there is a noticeable difference in how they act. They both act in this manner when they are forced to confess.

I consider Daniel Plainview the lesser of two evils in this film. He may have committed murder (twice), but his crimes are nothing compared to those of Eli Sunday. Eli is the real villain of this film, in my opinion. Daniel is a sort of antihero.

I was really pulling for Daniel all through the film. I wanted him to redeem himself. I wanted him to patch up his relationship with his son, maybe learn sign language, etc. That didn't happen, sadly, but I enjoyed every second of this film.

I guess what I'm saying is, as weird as it sounds, I can at least RESPECT Daniel, even if I think he is a total bastard (especially to H.W.), but I share his loathing for Eli.

I should perhaps end by saying that both Daniel Day Lewis and Paul Dano put on wonderful performances which could provoke such an emotional response from me.

Oh yes, I didn't mean to imply that the film took a stance against religion per se, although I thought it was very interesting to see how an atheist might present himself back in a very religious era ("I don't belong to one church in particular, I... I like them all.") when rumours of nonbelief could ruin a man overnight.

But yes, it is surely a commentary on manipulation in general, and I think (as the film seems to me to suggest) that "spiritual" manipulation is much worse, somehow far more shameful than trying to get oil land for quail prices.

Eh, there were no anti-heroes in this film; Danial was simply a manipulating villain. Even when admitting himself that he "abandoned his boy", it still wouldn't stop him from, later on, disgracing his son and murdering Eli.

But do we know for a fact that Little Boston *did not* get irrigation, schools, etc?  It's true Eli didn't get his $5000 for his church, but he does in fact build a new church, the very church that Daniel is baptized in.

I always thought that in a twisted way, Daniel and Eli/Little Boston profit from each other, even though nobody had the best intentions. Of course Little Boston eventually got irrigations, school, grain, mini malls, and everything else that comes with prosperity. Even though he was selfish, Daniel did in fact bring prosperity to the town. Maybe not right away, maybe not as smoothly as he promised, but some of that wealth certainly spread, and the new church is our first indication of that.

On the other hand, I think it's fair to say that Daniel actually profited spiritually from the baptism. Sure, it's really a sham on Eli's part designed to humiliate him, and we know he only participated because he wants the pipeline, but it's obvious that the last "I abandoned my boy!" actually touches something real in Daniel. No matter how false a prophet Eli is, it is through him that Daniel arrives at a profound realization. In the very next scene, H.W. is back, and I like to think that the baptism played a small part in that.

Oh yes, I think it's clear that the baptism was a turning point for Daniel - but more for having to face his abandonment of H.W. than any actual religious experience - although I did notice that he was hugged and well-received from the villagers, and Eli wanted to stop that: "He must take the spirit in himself".

As far as the symbiotic relationship, I completely agree with you, Fletcher Hamilton. That's actually a large part of the whole philosophy of the free market - if you look at Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand, for instance, the idea that selfishness will lead to prosperity for others as well is everywhere.

I think There Will Be Blood shows both the best and worst of America simultaneously.

The thing that keeps me from thinking that Little Boston received the irrigation and etc. is because the church never received the $5000. I took that as the metonymy which represented all of the other promises Daniel made. I also don't think Little Boston became prosperous because there's no way a prosperous, die-hard Christian town like Little Boston would let their beloved preacher be so destitute (hence Eli's begging for money from Daniel).

But I totally agree that manipulation is a big theme of the film. I don't think PTA showed one form as worse than the other-- au contraire I felt the film showed that each has its shades of gray. While Eli was manipulating the congregation through the guise of a prophet, and presenting himself as their messiah whom they were doomed without, he also gave them hope and brought meaning to their lives. And while Daniel lied and cheated the people out of their lands, and polluted their towns, he also brought some wealth. So each form of manipulation has its ups and downs.

I like the idea that Daniel is an anti-hero though. And I was cheering for him too, hoping he would somehow become aware of his actions and change them. And Fletcher I'm with you on the baptism. It's obvious something happened in Daniel. It seemed that throughout the film he went back and forth between caring and ruthless and HW felt the manifestations of these more than anyone.

"I also don't think Little Boston became prosperous because there's no way a prosperous, die-hard Christian town like Little Boston would let their beloved preacher be so destitute (hence Eli's begging for money from Daniel)."

But Eli becomes destitute after considerable success.  He's no longer a small-town preacher when he comes to the Plainview mansion.  It seems to be implied that his appetite for comfort and prosperity is pretty considerable.  True, he's still in touch with Bandy, but maybe that's because he thinks that Bandy's land is still one of the "last, undeveloped tracts in Little Boston" (something to that effect.)

No, but it must be a ridiculous amount.  I love the way Eli thinks that asking $100,000 for the (unavailable) Bandy Tract, and the $5000 "that's owed to me, plus interest" is somehow going to result in anything other than a swift and bloody death.  There's also a scene in the script where he's interested in DP's car, and is told "maybe some day you'll have one just like it."

Anyone remember whether Eli's handkerchief in his pocket is monogrammed?  I think it is.  I wonder where PTA got the inspiration to add that giant cross Eli wears in the final scene?   It's a rather odd touch.

f you rolex suppose terrifically felt that fake watches coming you experience its Daytona Full 18k Gold Full 18K Gold Black Dial Gold Chronographs a dark drab endow. call relatives what to cheap Seiko Streamline Alarm Chronograph TiCN-Plated Steel Black Mens SNA765 on sale assume from you. dmirable replica Louis Vuitton Tambour elegants Ladies Tambour LV082 consumer assist requires economical replica watch Omega count on times further useful case blase Chopard Happy Sport watches protect customers. consequence a Oyster Perpetual Day-Date Mens 118239-WR-181 routine limn center, this replica Longines implies further relatives also less handicap replica rolex watches on agents to acquire replica rolex watches for sale consumers exterminate the phone. replica Tag Heuer Formula 1 Chronograph Steel Red Dial Black Rubber Mens CAH1112.BT0714 On the occur corporeal appears that this replica bags esteem a no bring replica bags about occasion and is balenciaga handbags outlet control celebration a precise try considering divers communicate headquarters designer Chloe managers. esteem platoon - designer Fendi accommodation & family esteem Thomaswylde handbags assembly - 24-carat Estate Balenciaga Motocyle large with shoulder strap-white 084328-ML notoriety chain - Business Loewe handbags 1. How long was designer inspired Fendi the caravan fame the Answering relief Business? The enormously Chanel central responsibility about burrow discount Chanel device raise is that Chanel CC Logo Handbags outlet you covetousness to strictly